>
> I believe Deron has an A4000 mothballed somewhere, but does not appear to be
> using that Classic piece of Amiga hardware to develop the 68k version on,
> which I for one feel very disappointed with.

Why? The current market for 68k version of PageStream is _not_ focused
around classic hardware. Most people these days run some emulator.
PageStream5 on anything but the best classic hardware would be
unbearably slow.

> How can you port the software
> when you aren't developing it on the correct hardware?
Well, the correct hardware is perspective. The only modern (developed in
the last era as you put it) hardware I don't have is the new Sam. I'll
probably get a used Mac mini to run MOS before I get a Sam, but that is
simply again market size.

So have you been able to provide any kind of useful debug info from your
classic Amiga installation? See my problem?

> Also, if you are
> going to fix faults, well in the first place get it to work, for a piece of
> Classic Amiga hardware, then you should run it as a developer on that
> hardware to know where the problems really are.
>
> I wouldn't mind lending one of my A1200 systems to Deron if I knew he would
> use it to debug/develop PgS5 on.
>
>
>
> Neil Pearson
>

--
Deron Kazmaier - support@pagestream.org
Grasshopper LLC Publishing -http://www.pagestream.org
PageStream DTP for Amiga, Linux, Macintosh, and Windows

Hi Deron,

I don't want this matter to get heated or out of control, I just want some
straight answers, and the situation summarised with a short report about
where PgS5 is up to, specifically for 68k/OS4, if possible. I'll do what I
can, but development/debug tools for 68k are limited, as far as you have
made out, but if there are some I can use to assist you in this regard
please let me & of course others know.

I wondered long and hard about whether to send this message direct to you,
or just to the PgSAmigaBeta group, and I eventually decided to send it to
the group, so that everyone, some of whom may be pointing a finger at me,
gets to see the reason for my comments from my point of view, and also get
the benefit, I hope, from a few more things I noticed about PgS5 I have
tried, and suggestions I might have, sensible or ridiculous.

Remember, I have paid to support you, as much as I can, and am prepared to
support you further, but please be honest, if we have gone as far as we can
along the 68k road then just say so.

>> I believe Deron has an A4000 mothballed somewhere, but does not appear to
>> be
>> using that Classic piece of Amiga hardware to develop the 68k version on,
>> which I for one feel very disappointed with.
>
> Why?

So that you could check that PgS5 runs sufficiently on your own system,
which I take it you still have an A4000, though you didn't confirm that in
your reply, before releasing it to other Classic 68k users. The emulator you
are using maybe allowing you to use it within that environment, but as soon
as it is put on a genuine piece of Amiga hardware the position becomes all
to painfully clear that it just doesn't run on genuine Amiga 68k hardware
and is not fit for public release, even for basic beta testing. That IS my
point.

If there are no debug, stack error tools, or any other tools that can give
you an insight into where it is going wrong on the Classic 68k hardware then
surely you must try to run it on your own Classic Amiga hardware, before you
punish us, the 68k users, not including PPC OS4.x users, with it much more.
Surely you are more likely to know where the problems in it running are,
especially as you did the coding for the Amiga PgS4.x.x.x. versions, and
earlier versions as well.

Do you still have the PgS4.x.x.x. codebase, source code?

Is it not possible to utilise some of that code to implement it in the
current development for PgS5?

> The current market for 68k version of PageStream is _not_ focused around
> classic hardware.

Of course, I understand this, but you are trying to create a 68k version on
a PC with an Amiga emulator, when you haven't tested that it works on
genuine Classic Amiga hardware, a piece of hardware of which is in your
possession to do that with.

Most people these days run some emulator.

Of course, that is also true, the retro gaming world is full of such users &
uses, but not necessarily to design software on for the Classic hardware, or
at least I would seriously hope not.

I do not understand why the MUI system you are using under emulation for
PgS5 does not function correctly, e.g. window scrollbars

Until the scrollbars are sorted out the main screen is unusable as you
cannot get a life-size page on screen as the majority of the screen is taken
up by the massive, what should be scrollbars, that turn out to be black
blocks in their own window 2 to 3 times the size of the "main" PageStream
document window. You can see what I mean if you take a look at the
screengrabs I did, if you follow the link I gave in my previous message - at
the bottom of the webpage are the same screengrabs in a folder in JPG format
... the link ...http://www.pearson.1to1.org/PgS5a_Grabs/jpgs

The toolbars are also a problem as they have no sizing gadget so they lie
one on top of the other, and as they have no top window bar they are under
normal circumstances unmoveable, and unsizeable, so are to some extent
unusable, not withstanding the program isn't working, as you & we might have
hoped, so far.

> PageStream5 on anything but the best classic hardware would be unbearably
> slow.

Are you saying that me holding out for PgS5 on my 060/50 is not going to
work as quickly as PgS4 does, once it loads up that is? So am I wasting my
time & money holding out for the current version?

I have got PPC built onto the Blizzard, but OS4 on my Classic hardware is
worst of all poorly, should I say, non-existently supported by Hyperion. So
much for all that wait for Classic OS4. Please don't say the same is true
for PageStream 5.

>
>> How can you port the software when you aren't developing it on the
>> correct hardware?

> Well, the correct hardware is perspective.

It's not perspective when transferring it from your emulator system on which
it works shows that it is basically, well totally, unusable on a real 68k
Amiga or a PPC OS4.x system, is it?.

The only modern (developed in
> the last era as you put it) hardware I don't have is the new Sam. I'll
> probably get a used Mac mini to run MOS before I get a Sam, but that is
> simply again market size.

OK, that's an insight into your thinking which is appreciated.

I don't like to mention payments/money, but I feel I have to, just to put
the situation as it affects me directly back at you & in perspective. If I
remember correctly I paid for PgS 4 for OS4 PPC a few years ago, when it was
first mentioned that you work to implement it, PgS 4.x.x.x for OS4 PPC, so I
paid for that version to encourage you to complete it, but that seems now to
have been forgotten, and may never, in a working version, be released. I
have not had a sideways upgrade with the money, if I remember correctly, so
I paid in full for PgS 5, & I have paid for something I have not got, no
usable version of PgS5, though you may honour some discount off, or some
other transfer to another PgS product if I press it ... cos' that's the type
of guy you are. See I haven't forgotten you're a decent kinda'guy.

Early last year, I think it was, I paid for PgS5 for 68k, not knowing that
the package was far from useable, and I have to say, nothing was said to
discourage me, or advise me of it's almost complete unusability, and little
has happened to improve this situation, as least as far as I, a user, can
see to encourage 68k users like me to be upbeat, or for that matter OS4.x
users.

I am prepared to stick with the project, as I want to encourage you to bring
to the Amiga faithful, as that is what we are ( I hope I can speak for many
on that point ), an up to date PageStream version, both for 68k and OS4.x.

>
> So have you been able to provide any kind of useful debug info from your
> classic Amiga installation?

I put in my last message the link on my webpage the screengrabs I was able
to achieve on my system with 5.0.5.2., which seems was further than many
were able to achieve on their OS4.x systems I have to say.

See my problem?

I am trying to see your problem, but please don't take your eye of my
problem ... paid for a software package ... haven't got a working package
yet ... 2 years or more down the line from when I paid ... see my problem?
Surely I can't be the only Amiga user in this situation, or am I?

I know there are issues with PgS for all the OS's that you cater for, which
is a constant challenge to keep up to date, but you should be more
forthright about what PgS5 would work like on a 68k system. If it is not
going to run like any other 68k program, what I mean is that when you type
something or activate a function it isn't going to take an age, or halt
multi-tasking as I noticed the Workbench clock and many, if not all other
Workbench features were frozen out while PgS5.0.5.2 or 3 loaded up - and
then eventually crashed my system usually, for it to actually switch to that
function, etc. because if that is the case you might as well forget porting
it to 68k and just concentrate on a PPC version, unless you think the 68k
emulation under OS4 will be sufficient to allow it to work for both systems.

I really like PgS4, and other than a few minor tweaks it would be great as
it is, such as the PDF filter getting an update, and some of the printer
support being improved upon, and maybe a few other items others could
contribute, but it works sufficiently fast on a 68k system, and if that is
what PgS5 will work like then that will be OK for me, and I feel sure many
other PgS 68k users.

>
>> Also, if you are going to fix faults, well in the first place get it to
>> work, for a piece of
>> Classic Amiga hardware, then you should run it as a developer on that
>> hardware to know where the problems really are.

I see this remark didn't get a reply, and just wondered if it was correct?
As I have said, the development of PgS using emulation then passing it to
real Classic Amiga hardware just doesn't seem to work sufficiently well for
we users to get any benefit.

>>
>> I wouldn't mind lending one of my A1200 systems to Deron if I knew he
>> would
>> use it to debug/develop PgS5 on.

Would one my A1200's be of any use, or do you still have your A4000?

Neil Pearson

Hello Neil,

I debated whether to respond to your message or not. Obviously, I
decided to do so. I don't find your message objectionable and you
wrote quite civilly. My only comment is that the Amiga World is
different and unlikely to change greatly in the near future. Thus, I
don't expect development to proceed as I would wish or has it does
elsewhere. Given how few the developers are, and the case of
PageStream it seems a majority of one, I would rather rethink how to
facilitate development rather than review past history, my investment -
which is a major one, etc.

Thus, my proposal to see if some type of way can be established to
help Deron with hardware. I still use PageStream in serious work and I
look forward to the next generation. But I realize that is going to be
a slow and not necessarily consistent process. And like you, I hope
Deron honestly reports, at least within the limits of prudence. More
importantly, I want to facilitate Deron and development of my beloved
PageStream. Rethinking how to facilitate development in the Amiga
environment is my preferred dialogue at this stage.

On 01/27/2010, you wrote:

> Hi Deron,

> I don't want this matter to get heated or out of control, I just want
> some straight answers, and the situation summarised with a short
> report about where PgS5 is up to, specifically for 68k/OS4, if
> possible. I'll do what I can, but development/debug tools for 68k
> are limited, as far as you have made out, but if there are some I
> can use to assist you in this regard please let me & of course
> others know.

--- Message snipped ---

> Neil Pearson

>
Talk to you later.
--
Dr. Larry Keller
Levin College of Urban Affairs
Cleveland State University
lkeller100@cox.net

Hello,

On 25/01/2010, Dr. Larry Keller wrote:

> Hello Bart,
> On 01/25/2010, you wrote:
>> I wonder how many of us really need this Amiga program. Probably not
>> enough to raise enough funds to get you a SAM, I'm afraid.

I'm sorry if I didn't follow the discussion but what is it about?
Does Deron have no more OS4 capable hardware?

Bye
--
Philippe 'Elwood' FERRUCCI
Sam440 Flex 733Mhz
http://elwoodb.free.fr

Hello Philippe,

On 01/28/2010, you wrote:

> Hello,

> On 25/01/2010, Dr. Larry Keller wrote:

>> Hello Bart,
>> On 01/25/2010, you wrote:
>>> I wonder how many of us really need this Amiga program. Probably
>>> not enough to raise enough funds to get you a SAM, I'm afraid.

> I'm sorry if I didn't follow the discussion but what is it about?
> Does Deron have no more OS4 capable hardware?

Apparently, Deron does not have native OS4 hardware. In a seriess of
discussions around version 5 I wondered in a message if we could get
hardware for Deron - if he thought that was necessary. Previous
messages thought the lack of such hardware was a problem, especially
for SAM users. This led to additional messages.

Hope this is useful. My main point was, and always will be, to
facilitate OS 4 app development. And I am particularly willing to do
so in the case of Deron who has made not only a great program but
sacrificed in doing so.

> Bye

Talk to you later.
--
Dr. Larry Keller
Levin College of Urban Affairs
Cleveland State University
lkeller100@cox.net

Dr. Larry Keller wrote:
> Hello Philippe,
>
> On 01/28/2010, you wrote:
>
>
>> Hello,
>>
>
>
>> On 25/01/2010, Dr. Larry Keller wrote:
>>
>
>
>>> Hello Bart,
>>> On 01/25/2010, you wrote:
>>>
>>>> I wonder how many of us really need this Amiga program. Probably
>>>> not enough to raise enough funds to get you a SAM, I'm afraid.
>>>>
>
>
>> I'm sorry if I didn't follow the discussion but what is it about?
>> Does Deron have no more OS4 capable hardware?
>>
>
> Apparently, Deron does not have native OS4 hardware. In a seriess of
> discussions around version 5 I wondered in a message if we could get
> hardware for Deron - if he thought that was necessary. Previous
> messages thought the lack of such hardware was a problem, especially
> for SAM users. This led to additional messages.
>
> Hope this is useful. My main point was, and always will be, to
> facilitate OS 4 app development. And I am particularly willing to do
> so in the case of Deron who has made not only a great program but
> sacrificed in doing so.
>

Let me correct some misunderstanding. I have an A1!!! What I don't have
on the Amiga is a SAM, but since I'm not sitting around looking for
something to do, that doesn't really seem to be a problem right now. I
even have a pegasos which I understand OS4 now runs on. So that is all
covered.

I'm working on the 68k version because that is the furthest behind of
all the PageStream releases.

Deron

--
Deron Kazmaier - support@pagestream.org
Grasshopper LLC Publishing -http://www.pagestream.org
PageStream DTP for Amiga, Linux, Macintosh, and Windows

Hello Deron,

On 01/28/2010, you wrote:
>>
> Let me correct some misunderstanding. I have an A1!!! What I don't
> have on the Amiga is a SAM, but since I'm not sitting around looking
> for something to do, that doesn't really seem to be a problem right
> now. I even have a pegasos which I understand OS4 now runs on. So
> that is all covered.

> I'm working on the 68k version because that is the furthest behind of

> all the PageStream releases.

Message heard and my misunderstanding is clarified. Of course, that
means no excuses now.

> Deron

Talk to you later.
--
Dr. Larry Keller
Levin College of Urban Affairs
Cleveland State University
lkeller100@cox.net

Hello,

On 28/01/2010, PageStream Support wrote:

> Let me correct some misunderstanding. I have an A1!!! I
> even have a pegasos which I understand OS4 now runs on.

Ah it's what thought I remembered.
Good.

Bye
--
Philippe 'Elwood' FERRUCCI
Sam440 Flex 733Mhz
http://elwoodb.free.fr

Why isn't the 68k version of PageStream dropped anyway?
I know this might start a flame war, but I really do not see the point in it..
Version 4 works well for 68k and people using PGS5 on an ultrafast hardware on WinUAE are better off using the Linux or Window version anyway. Or am I wrong here?
It's a pity because of this mess with 68k, aros, morphos, os4 pagestream does not work really well on any platform. I so much would like to publicise PageStream for Amiga but there really is no point.
srry for the harsh words
On 29/gen/2010, at 22.34, Philippe Ferrucci wrote:

> Hello,
>
> On 28/01/2010, PageStream Support wrote:
>
>> Let me correct some misunderstanding. I have an A1!!! I
>> even have a pegasos which I understand OS4 now runs on.
>
> Ah it's what thought I remembered.
> Good.
>
> Bye
> --
> Philippe 'Elwood' FERRUCCI
> Sam440 Flex 733Mhz
>http://elwoodb.free.fr
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> PageStream Amiga. Desktop Publishing for Classic Amiga, OS4, and MorphOS.http://www.pagestream.orgYahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Hallo Remo,

I agree especially now that AmigaOS 4.x hardware is available and
going to be moreso. The Future is more critical than the past.

Am 01/30/2010 schriebst Du:

> Why isn't the 68k version of PageStream dropped anyway?
> I know this might start a flame war, but I really do not see the
> point in it.. Version 4 works well for 68k and people using PGS5 on
> an ultrafast hardware on WinUAE are better off using the Linux or
> Window version anyway. Or am I wrong here? It's a pity because of
> this mess with 68k, aros, morphos, os4 pagestream does not work
> really well on any platform. I so much would like to publicise
> PageStream for Amiga but there really is no point. srry for the harsh
> words On 29/gen/2010, at 22.34, Philippe Ferrucci wrote:

>> Hello,
>>
>> On 28/01/2010, PageStream Support wrote:
>>
>>> Let me correct some misunderstanding. I have an A1!!! I
>>> even have a pegasos which I understand OS4 now runs on.
>>
>> Ah it's what thought I remembered.
>> Good.
>>
>> Bye
>> --
>> Philippe 'Elwood' FERRUCCI
>> Sam440 Flex 733Mhz
>>http://elwoodb.free.fr
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> PageStream Amiga. Desktop Publishing for Classic Amiga, OS4, and
>> MorphOS.http://www.pagestream.orgYahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>

>
Gruss,
--
Dr. Larry Keller
Levin College of Urban Affairs
Cleveland State University
lkeller100@cox.net

Hi Remo

> Why isn't the 68k version of PageStream dropped anyway?

Hopefully, because there are some people who are actually still using the
hardware that the Amiga was actually designed for, namely the 68k processor
family, like me, that have already paid for it.

> I know this might start a flame war, but I really do not see the point in
> it..

Of course you don't, once you moved to PPC hardware you don't look back, but
some, like me, still use the 68k hardware to actually use the software that
was actually programmed to work on the Amiga 68k hardware.

Besides which the 68k version was, if I remember correctly, announced at the
same time as all other PgS5 versions to be announced for the Amiga, and I'd
like to think, seeing as I have already paid for it, that I would actually
get what I paid for, which I would hope you would support wholeheartedly. I
don't think you would like to pay for a version then not have it be released
for your system would you?

The thing is, the 68k version should work on ALL Amiga systems, as far as I
am aware, as they all have 68k emulation, but PPC would restrict the user
base just because of the hardware.

> Version 4 works well for 68k and people using PGS5 on an ultrafast
> hardware on WinUAE are better off using the Linux or Window version
> anyway. Or am I wrong here?

I think I can say, as far as I am concerned, you are wrong, as I have tried
to explain above.

> It's a pity because of this mess with 68k, aros, morphos, os4 pagestream
> does not work really well on any platform. I so much would like to
> publicise PageStream for Amiga but there really is no point.

No point publicising a program that does not do what it says on the
tin-ternet as yet.

I have a PPC board in my machine, and if Hyperion had done a more thorough
job of supporting more Amiga hardware, and continued support, and
development, as was promised, for the Classic OS4 and the Phase 5/DCE boards
then I would not have a basically disfunctional OS4 on my Amiga with Phase 5
and other add-on hardware.

> srry for the harsh words

No offence taken,

Neil Pearson

Hi Larry

> I agree especially now that AmigaOS 4.x hardware is available and
> going to be moreso. The Future is more critical than the past.

I'd like you to consider the below criteria, before you cast off the whole
of the 68k userbase, which no doubt, you used to be part of :-

1. Compatability, should be more widely useable than the PPC OS4.x version.
2. Honouring payments already made for a specific version that has not seen
a full release as yet maybe another of the reasons why Deron is continuing
with 68k version

The ACube SAM hardware is, in my opinion, overly expensive for what it is,
as was the A-One or similar clones. I would rather see the AROS project
continue and bring us the compatability with cheap PC hardware to use our
favourite operating system on, with such hardware as the ARES ONE, being
sold by Vesalia.

Just my opinion, and something else to think about, for a moment or two, or
longer,

Neil Pearson

>
> Am 01/30/2010 schriebst Du:
>
>> Why isn't the 68k version of PageStream dropped anyway?
>> I know this might start a flame war, but I really do not see the
>> point in it.. Version 4 works well for 68k and people using PGS5 on
>> an ultrafast hardware on WinUAE are better off using the Linux or
>> Window version anyway. Or am I wrong here? It's a pity because of
>> this mess with 68k, aros, morphos, os4 pagestream does not work
>> really well on any platform. I so much would like to publicise
>> PageStream for Amiga but there really is no point. srry for the harsh
>> words On 29/gen/2010, at 22.34, Philippe Ferrucci wrote:
>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> On 28/01/2010, PageStream Support wrote:
>>>
>>>> Let me correct some misunderstanding. I have an A1!!! I
>>>> even have a pegasos which I understand OS4 now runs on.
>>>
>>> Ah it's what thought I remembered.
>>> Good.
>>>
>>> Bye
>>> --
>>> Philippe 'Elwood' FERRUCCI
>>> Sam440 Flex 733Mhz
>>>http://elwoodb.free.fr
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------
>>>
>>> PageStream Amiga. Desktop Publishing for Classic Amiga, OS4, and
>>> MorphOS.http://www.pagestream.orgYahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>
>>
> Gruss,
> --
> Dr. Larry Keller
> Levin College of Urban Affairs
> Cleveland State University
> lkeller100@cox.net
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> PageStream Amiga. Desktop Publishing for Classic Amiga, OS4, and MorphOS.
>http://www.pagestream.orgYahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2655 - Release Date: 01/29/10
09:08:00

Hi Larry

Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 10:12 PM

> --- Message snipped ---

> I debated whether to respond to your message or not. Obviously, I
> decided to do so. I don't find your message objectionable and you
> wrote quite civilly.

OK, thanks for that. I should also like to say, that even though my message
was directed at Deron, and even though he has replied to others on this
group about Amiga related PageStream matters I have not had the same
privilege extended to me by Deron, as yet. Which is disappointing. I had
held off saying so, until I had waited to see other replies from Deron to
other members on the group, but now I feel it justifies commenting on.

My only comment is that the Amiga World is
> different and unlikely to change greatly in the near future. Thus, I
> don't expect development to proceed as I would wish or has it does
> elsewhere. Given how few the developers are, and the case of
> PageStream it seems a majority of one.

There is Hollywood, and Digital Universe to name 2 still developed Amiga
applications, plus other Open Source projects that are getting quite
advanced in their releases, but you are right that there are much fewer new
applications being developed, at present.

> I still use PageStream in serious work and I look forward to the next
> generation.

Me too.

> And like you, I hope
> Deron honestly reports, at least within the limits of prudence.

I'm still waiting for any report, which I have to say, would be greatly
appreciated, overdue, but very welcome.

Neil Pearson

Hello Neil,

On 01/30/2010, you wrote:

> Hi Larry

>> I agree especially now that AmigaOS 4.x hardware is available and
>> going to be moreso. The Future is more critical than the past.

> I'd like you to consider the below criteria, before you cast off the
> whole of the 68k userbase, which no doubt, you used to be part of :-

> 1. Compatability, should be more widely useable than the PPC OS4.x
> version. 2. Honouring payments already made for a specific version
> that has not seen a full release as yet maybe another of the reasons
> why Deron is continuing with 68k version

> The ACube SAM hardware is, in my opinion, overly expensive for what
> it is, as was the A-One or similar clones. I would rather see the
> AROS project continue and bring us the compatability with cheap PC
> hardware to use our favourite operating system on, with such
> hardware as the ARES ONE, being sold by Vesalia.

> Just my opinion, and something else to think about, for a moment or
> two, or longer,

I do think that if 68K development is stopped, some compensation of
some type is indeed due those who purchased it. I am still using
version 4 for all my work that needs desktop publishing and it is quite
robust. It will lack the most contemporary capabilities but is still
usuable.

Separately, the Amiga cannot survive - and is only barely surviving
currently - if an AROS solution is used. And unless AROS uses
Windows/Linux drivers, drivers will be a major problem. And keeping
AROS compatible with the most current drivers and driver startegy will
be a major headache as users will demand it to run on any hardware they
can obtain. Also, AROS would eliminate any need for Amiga apps, as the
hardware would not be specific and Windows/Apple/Linux/etc., would be
easily usuable. I do think the PPC type CPU offers advantages in terms
of performance and energy use as well. Given a small market, I would
rather see a talented developer such as Deron more focused.

A consequence of going on separate hardware is increased price.
Apple has done this successfully and in light of the often shabby and
almost corrupt history of our beloved machine, AmigaOne and similar
products have been relatively successful. I think price will always be
an issue unless a larger market develops, which is not probable,
especially in the short term. But for the long run, I think judicious
hardware that can use developer creativity is the best startegy. The X
1000 is an example.

> Neil Pearson

>>
>> Am 01/30/2010 schriebst Du:
>>
>>> Why isn't the 68k version of PageStream dropped anyway?
>>> I know this might start a flame war, but I really do not see the
>>> point in it.. Version 4 works well for 68k and people using PGS5 on
>>> an ultrafast hardware on WinUAE are better off using the Linux or
>>> Window version anyway. Or am I wrong here? It's a pity because of
>>> this mess with 68k, aros, morphos, os4 pagestream does not work
>>> really well on any platform. I so much would like to publicise
>>> PageStream for Amiga but there really is no point. srry for the
>>> harsh words On 29/gen/2010, at 22.34, Philippe Ferrucci wrote:
>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> On 28/01/2010, PageStream Support wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Let me correct some misunderstanding. I have an A1!!! I
>>>>> even have a pegasos which I understand OS4 now runs on.
>>>>
>>>> Ah it's what thought I remembered.
>>>> Good.
>>>>
>>>> Bye
>>>> --
>>>> Philippe 'Elwood' FERRUCCI
>>>> Sam440 Flex 733Mhz
>>>>http://elwoodb.free.fr
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> PageStream Amiga. Desktop Publishing for Classic Amiga, OS4, and
>>>> MorphOS.http://www.pagestream.orgYahoo! Groups Links
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>>
>> Gruss,
>> --
>> Dr. Larry Keller
>> Levin College of Urban Affairs
>> Cleveland State University
>> lkeller100@cox.net
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> PageStream Amiga. Desktop Publishing for Classic Amiga, OS4, and
>> MorphOS. http://www.pagestream.orgYahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>

>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2655 - Release Date:
> 01/29/10 09:08:00

>
Talk to you later.
--
Dr. Larry Keller
Levin College of Urban Affairs
Cleveland State University
lkeller100@cox.net

Hello,

I always thought staying on 68k kills the PPC AmigaOS.

68k users still don't understand a simple fact:
OS4 is much appealing to developers than OS3. They can use Cairo, OpenGL, SDL, virtualized memory.... These have some interest to developers, thus they have a reason to get back to OS4.

With no developers, it is obvious that OS3 will never ever evolve! We can already consider it as "something from the past".

In the meantime, all other operating systems will continue to evolve. So what will happen in a few years? Do you really think people will stay on OS3????
Of course not, they want to evolve too so they will all jump to up-to-date operating systems.

As time goes by, less and less people will forget about the Amiga (think about your children) and we'll become to an end.

Sam boards are too expensive?????? Damn you forgot about the past already?
Read this:
http://www.cucug.org/amiga/amiinfo/reviews/CyberStorm060.txt

The CSPPC was 980 euros and it was *just* a CPU board. The Sam440 is:
- a complete motherboard!
- a new hardware!
- a lot faster!
and it's even more silent than a CSPPC

That said, I tend to think that 68k Amigans do want to kill the Amiga operating system.
Sad but true.

Bye
--
Philippe 'Elwood' FERRUCCI
Sam440 Flex 733Mhz
http://elwoodb.free.fr

Hi Philippe

--- MESSAGE SNIPPED ---

> I always thought staying on 68k kills the PPC AmigaOS.

I personally cannot understand why there was no 68k OS4, I'm sure the 68k
could handle the OS, but faster CPUs are usually an improvement.

> 68k users still don't understand a simple fact:
> OS4 is much appealing to developers than OS3. They can use Cairo, OpenGL,
> SDL, virtualized memory.... These have some interest to developers, thus
> they have a reason to get back to OS4.

So since November 2007, release of Classic OS4, I don't see many developers
jumping on board the developer train, and producing any of the virtualized
software you are giving them a reason to develop for. Larry Keller in one of
his messages said that PageStream is the only one still being developed,
though I mentioned Hollywood, and Digital Universe as 2 others, but I'm
struggling to think of many more virtualized memory, etc. type software
under development, or that have been released, or do you know something
different?

>
> With no developers, it is obvious that OS3 will never ever evolve! We can
> already consider it as "something from the past".

OS3 still has a following, and there are some who consider there should be a
Boing Bag 3, even if it is an unofficial one.

Anyway, let's not get into an Amiga 68k v. PPC dispute, this article is
about PageStream, and I see no reason to deter Deron from completing a
stable release for 68k as I have already said, most of the other Amiga OS's
than the 68k version have some kind of 68k emulation, even WinUAE, as far as
I can remember, so 68k software is still OK via interpretation, or on an
actual 68k based Amiga, Shock, horror !!
>
> In the meantime, all other operating systems will continue to evolve. So
> what will happen in a few years? Do you really think people will stay on
> OS3????

I had hoped to migrate to OS4, but at present I am reluctant to do so, but
it is definitely NOT out of the question, so I may well migrate, but not at
present, as I feel there is still plenty of use in the 68k as yet, for me.

> Of course not, they want to evolve too so they will all jump to up-to-date
> operating systems.
>
> As time goes by, less and less people will forget about the Amiga (think
> about your children) and we'll become to an end.
>
I think you meant that statement the other way around (more and more people
...) but I feel there is enough interest in the 68k OS for it to be of use,
but you are correct there is more activity apparent on OS4 Depot and even
Aminet of recent, but nothing of major note.
>
>
> Sam boards are too expensive?????? Damn you forgot about the past already?

I bought one of my BlizzardPPCs for £100, and put it on my £1.50p A1200
board with 3.1 ROMs already fitted, in my £10 Eyetech Z4 tower with my £30
Mediator, and £0.99p Voodoo card, and £0.99p Soundblaster 128 card, and
£0.99p Ethernet card, so that didn't cost too much did it?

This easily runs PgS 4.1.5.6 68k, and it functions very well, in 8, 16, 24
or 32 bit graphics, and I am very happy with the performance, which is at
least as fast as my Windows XP and MS Word, that can't do as much.

If PgS5 can operate at the same speed on my system I see no reason why not
to encourage Deron to continue its development.

> Read this:
>http://www.cucug.org/amiga/amiinfo/reviews/CyberStorm060.txt
>
> The CSPPC was 980 euros and it was *just* a CPU board. The Sam440 is:
> - a complete motherboard!
> - a new hardware!
> - a lot faster!
> and it's even more silent than a CSPPC

I'm not going there, this is a PageStream forum not a flame war arena. Let's
get back on topic.
>
>
> That said, I tend to think that 68k Amigans do want to kill the Amiga
> operating system.

That is a remark I'd rather just say is certainly not true, as far as I am
concerned.

Why would I, like lots of other Amiga users buy the Classic OS4 operating
system, which was then promptly, 3 months later dumped, no further
development planned, by Hyperion? The same people developing OS4.x+. Left me
with a bad feeling about buying their software, unfortunately.

I bought Classic OS4 to run the OS4/PPC, and the intended versions of PgS 4
and PgS 5, but they have not been completed as yet, so I cannot use them,
not even after 2 years of waiting. So why spend such a large amount for a
standalone PPC system when my favourite DTP program, that's PageStream, is
not available (PgS 4 or 5) to run without coughing and spluttering, and
crashing, on either the 68k or PPC PgS5 version I have already paid for -
both versions that is.

> Sad but true.

Unfortunately you are not correct on that point.
>
I am here for the Amiga OS in whatever way I can, as long as it is viable
for me to do so. I paid a sixth of the price for Windows XP Pro (£10) -
GENUINE, than what I paid for Classic Amiga OS 4 £65 approx and I wouldn't
do that if I didn't intend to support the Amiga OS in whatever code it was
developed in, but Hyperion haven't welcomed me in to OS4.x+ by their actions
as yet.

I'm still committed to PageStream, if Deron is still committed to 68k
development.

Neil Pearson

--- In PageStreamAmigaBeta@yahoogroups.com, Philippe Ferrucci

> The CSPPC was 980 euros and it was *just* a CPU board.
> The Sam440 is:
> - a complete motherboard!
> - a new hardware!
> - a lot faster!
> and it's even more silent than a CSPPC

Although this is a bit off-topic, I thought I'd mention that for about 850 euros I got a completely silent pre-assembled SAM system in a stylish miniITX case, with SATA HD and a slim DVD drive, and the price included OS4.1. The value for money is incomparable to any 68K hardware ever produced.

Regards,
Daniel

On 31/gen/2010, at 01.44, Neil Pearson wrote:

> Hi Remo
>
>> Why isn't the 68k version of PageStream dropped anyway?
>
> Hopefully, because there are some people who are actually still using the
> hardware that the Amiga was actually designed for, namely the 68k processor
> family, like me, that have already paid for it.
>

I'm not really sure what you are trying to say with I quote:

"the hardware that the _Amiga_ was actually designed for, namely the 68k processor"

but in the light of the history and the development the Amiga had, we all should be able to see that this is not going to bring the platform forward.
The 68k processor is not going to enter the desktop market ever again. And a software supporting different version of the same OS is not as easy as it may seem. Moreover in this time when the AmigaOS is trying to catch up with the present.

>> I know this might start a flame war, but I really do not see the point in
>> it..
>
> Of course you don't, once you moved to PPC hardware you don't look back, but
> some, like me, still use the 68k hardware to actually use the software that
> was actually programmed to work on the Amiga 68k hardware.
>
> Besides which the 68k version was, if I remember correctly, announced at the
> same time as all other PgS5 versions to be announced for the Amiga, and I'd
> like to think, seeing as I have already paid for it, that I would actually
> get what I paid for, which I would hope you would support wholeheartedly. I
> don't think you would like to pay for a version then not have it be released
> for your system would you?
>

I understand this very well, and it would be more than fair if you get a refund for what you paid or a discount or a free cross update.

Who followed the mailing list over some years, knows that Deron had had hard time in life and AFAIR the announcement was made before all that, and maybe in a time in which an 68k version would still have made sense. Now he obviously had foretold wrong the future and had made a bad decision back then.

In the light of this and without feeling pity for anyone, it's up to each one of us to decide if this 70 or whatever dollars, euro we paid some years ago, are so important as to impede this software to evolve and force the author to fulfill this obsolete announcement and waste his time.

I'm not against fairness and all, but we have to remember our humanity.
The money you paid for this software might be really missing in your briefcase as I don't know your financial situation. I do not swim in money either, but if you really need it I think I can help milden your pain refunding you with some 30-40$. Just out of sympathy for Deron.

> The thing is, the 68k version should work on ALL Amiga systems, as far as I
> am aware, as they all have 68k emulation, but PPC would restrict the user
> base just because of the hardware.
>
>> Version 4 works well for 68k and people using PGS5 on an ultrafast
>> hardware on WinUAE are better off using the Linux or Window version
>> anyway. Or am I wrong here?
>
> I think I can say, as far as I am concerned, you are wrong, as I have tried
> to explain above.
>
>> It's a pity because of this mess with 68k, aros, morphos, os4 pagestream
>> does not work really well on any platform. I so much would like to
>> publicise PageStream for Amiga but there really is no point.
>
> No point publicising a program that does not do what it says on the
> tin-ternet as yet.
>
> I have a PPC board in my machine, and if Hyperion had done a more thorough
> job of supporting more Amiga hardware, and continued support, and
> development, as was promised, for the Classic OS4 and the Phase 5/DCE boards
> then I would not have a basically disfunctional OS4 on my Amiga with Phase 5
> and other add-on hardware.
>

Sorry, I really don't understand why you blame Hyperion for not supporting 18 years old hardware, (which was not official hardware anyway but an add on from a 3rd party).
I think You are aware of how other players in the software and/or Operating system industry work right?

I can imagine development and support for "old" hardware does cost money at Hyperions too. And I'm sure if the management there would have money and time in excess they might be thinking of paying a bunch of developers for 2/3 months just to fulfill a promise (which I really have not heard of) to support some old hardware maybe 10 users around the world are still using. And the question is for how long will they be using it.

The 68k with PPC Amiga are a thing of the past, sorry it is so. they are very well at fulfilling tasks from that era. Now a computer should be able to display a picture made with 12MB pixel camera, and loading the next one without running out of memory or taking 20 seconds to do so.

>> srry for the harsh words
>
> No offence taken,
>

thanks

From : "Neil Pearson "

> So since November 2007, release of Classic OS4, I don't see many developers
> jumping on board the developer train
Maybe not yet. I hope for the future.
But the features I mentioned are useful for the developers we already have.
We'll soon have the latest versions of Apache/PHP/MySQL, OpenODBC, Firefox and we are talking about OpenOffice right now.
Of course, none of them will ever happen on OS3.

Anyway, the world evolves and at some point people will be forced to change to PPC, like animals that adapt to their new environment
It's just a matter of time.

Elwood

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> Hi Deron,
>
>

Hi Neal,

You make it hard for me to correspond with you because you are, well, a
prolific writer. I don't have time, nor desire, to discus dozens of
points which are either repetitive or not applicable. I hope you understand.

I'm going to cut this down to what I think are the important points.

> I just want some straight answers

I always answer to the best of my knowledge.

> and the situation summarised with a short report about where PgS5 is up to

Instead of a report, you have an actual download. The varying posts
should tell you that your actual experience will vary depending on a
whole host of factors. This is a transparent process that you are part of.

> but please be honest, if we have gone as far as we can along the 68k road then just say so.
>

This is a bit of a slap. You imply by asking me to be honest, that I
haven't or might not be. If you equate wrong to dishonest, then we
should probably limit our contact in the future.

> Do you still have the PgS4.x.x.x. codebase, source code?
> Is it not possible to utilise some of that code to implement it in the
> current development for PgS5?
>

Sigh. Of course I do. How do you think I got to PageStream5/PageStream5
Amiga?

> when you haven't tested that it works on genuine Classic Amiga hardware,
>
<snip>
> Until the scrollbars are sorted out the main screen is unusable

Obviously, I have your situation confused with others. I thought you
couldn't run PageStream. Maybe you are now talking about a different
computers. If the most recent release broke something that was working,
that would be good info to know.

>> PageStream5 on anything but the best classic hardware would be unbearably
>> slow.
>>
>
> Are you saying that me holding out for PgS5 on my 060/50 is not going to
> work as quickly as PgS4 does, once it loads up that is? So am I wasting my
> time & money holding out for the current version?
>
<snip>
> I really like PgS4, and other than a few minor tweaks it would be great as
> it is, such as the PDF filter getting an update, and some of the printer
> support being improved upon, and maybe a few other items others could
> contribute, but it works sufficiently fast on a 68k system, and if that is
> what PgS5 will work like then that will be OK for me, and I feel sure many
> other PgS 68k users.
>
Is not an 060/50 the best classic hardware? PageStream5 does much more
then PageStream4. It will be slower in some regards. It has more complex
color management, antialiased drawing, alpha channel blending, and other
features which impact the redrawing of the page. It also does more with
buffers to reduce the slow down, and on modern hardware you don't notice
it. As to what will be the final result on 68k, which is already
dependent on intense optimization from PageStream 4, I don't know.

If that is wasting your time, well, I can't answer that one. The issue
of speed is not black & white. I can't bare to run PageStream on classic
hardware, but I also use PageStream on much faster hardware. I used to
program on an Apple II with floppy disks. When I got a hard drive, I
could not longer stand the floppy drive. The floppy drive didn't get
slower. I just got used to faster.

>
>>> How can you port the software when you aren't developing it on the
>>> correct hardware?
>>>
>
>
>> Well, the correct hardware is perspective.
>>
>
> It's not perspective when transferring it from your emulator system on which
> it works shows that it is basically, well totally, unusable on a real 68k
> Amiga or a PPC OS4.x system, is it?.
>

I'm not going to keep talking in circles with you. You want me to
develop on _your_ hardware. I'm developing on the hardware which I think
best summarizes my market. You act like PageStream doesn't work for you,
and now it sounds like you just have issue with various bits. I'm trying
to get everyone to the point where they can open a new window. If you
are doing that, then your issues are not the issues I am sorting out.
Issues like no move bar on the toolbar are known issues, and are true on
every single system configuration.

I should summarize this with a statement to everyone who wants to second
guess what platform I should be developing for and which ones I
shouldn't. My choices are based on sales. Maybe 5.0 won't sell enough on
the Amiga to warrant a 5.1/6.0 whatever. I'll cross that road when I get
to it. If I could make a profit developing PageStream for Atari ST, Palm
OS, or pocket watches, I would. Just because it is not the best
platform, or your platform, is irrelevant.

Deron

--
Happy Trails,
Deron Kazmaier deron@dogstarkennel.com
KD0AYO Western South Dakota
Dog Star Kennelhttp://www.dogstarkennel.com
--- Racing AKC Sepp-Star Seppala Siberian Husky Sled Dogs

--
Deron Kazmaier - support@pagestream.org
Grasshopper LLC Publishing -http://www.pagestream.org
PageStream DTP for Amiga, Linux, Macintosh, and Windows

Hi Deron,

I'm going to keep it shor ... (started already)

> You make it hard for me to correspond with you because you are, well, a
> prolific writer.

In Quick mode now

> I always answer to the best of my knowledge.

I believe you, and before I go any further I TRUST you, and also I think of
you as an HONEST person, hopefully enough said on that subject..

> Instead of a report, you have an actual download. The varying posts
> should tell you that your actual experience will vary depending on a
> whole host of factors. This is a transparent process that you are part of.

Do you mean I should try out PgS5.0.5.2 and 5.0.5.3? If so, I already have,
and I have already said what my mileage was for them, and left screengrabs
on my website. Details on my previous messages

Were the screengrabs any use to you, if you have looked at them?

If there is something else you meant then please explain that to me/us all.

>> but please be honest, if we have gone as far as we can along the 68k road
>> then just say so.
>>
>
> This is a bit of a slap. You imply by asking me to be honest, that I
> haven't or might not be.

You are reading too much into the word *honest* in the context I have used
it. I just mean is there any mileage left in a 68k version?

If you equate wrong to dishonest, then we
> should probably limit our contact in the future.

I trust I have explained this above, and I can only apologise if I had given
that impression which was never my intention. I would have hoped you would
have remembered previous messages from me, and that I have no intention of
upsetting you by maligning your support for the Amiga, which is almost
legendary in the Amiga community. You always get my highest admiration,
consideration & support for all your PgS efforts stretching over the years.

I hope I have explained this already, above, I TRUST you, and believe you to
be HONEST, always have. It's just the lack of progress thus far, after over
2 years of waiting. I feel sure you can understand this for me, & of course
many other Amiga users, and I feel sure you already feel this as a
developer.
>
>> Do you still have the PgS4.x.x.x. codebase, source code?
>> Is it not possible to utilise some of that code to implement it in the
>> current development for PgS5?
>>
>
> Sigh. Of course I do. How do you think I got to PageStream5/PageStream5
> Amiga?

I thought you had started a new codebase for PgS5, I thought there must be
major areas of change to the latest version that would be incompatible with
PgS4 code, that's all.

I'd like to see a new PDF.filter for PgS4, if it were possible, as a
stop-gap to completing PgS5, but only if it was not going to slow down
progress on PgS5 that much. Or maybe afterwards, if you feel it could be
justified, as it really is a useful tool for PageStream 4.
>
>
>> when you haven't tested that it works on genuine Classic Amiga hardware,
>>
> <snip>
>> Until the scrollbars are sorted out the main screen is unusable
>
> Obviously, I have your situation confused with others. I thought you
> couldn't run PageStream.

I could run PgS 5.0.5.2, but PgS 5.0.5.3 I cannot get to start. I get past
the 5.0.5.3. Personalisation window, via the previously saved Alpha MUI
screen of 5.0.5.2, but after the Personalisation window/screen exits, that's
it, nothing else happens, and then eventually the whole of my Amiga freezes,
and it's Ctrl+A+A >>----> reset time again.

Maybe you are now talking about a different computers. If the most recent
release broke something that was working,
> that would be good info to know.

Yep, that seems to be the case. Hope this helps.

>
>>> PageStream5 on anything but the best classic hardware would be
>>> unbearably
>>> slow.
>>>
>>
>> Are you saying that me holding out for PgS5 on my 060/50 is not going to
>> work as quickly as PgS4 does, once it loads up that is? So am I wasting
>> my
>> time & money holding out for the current version?
>>
> <snip>
>> I really like PgS4, and other than a few minor tweaks it would be great
>> as
>> it is, such as the PDF filter getting an update, and some of the printer
>> support being improved upon, and maybe a few other items others could
>> contribute, but it works sufficiently fast on a 68k system, and if that
>> is
>> what PgS5 will work like then that will be OK for me, and I feel sure
>> many
>> other PgS 68k users.
>>
> Is not an 060/50 the best classic hardware?

That's what I thought you meant, but there are other Amiga PgS users, mainly
OS4.x PPC users, who it seems do not want to see a 68k version at all, but I
keep saying there is more 68k emulation in most of the Amiga-esque OSs so
68k for one version of PgS should be quite usable for many of the Amiga OSes
out there, including WinUAE.

Is this your point of view & reasoning also?

> PageStream5 does much more
> than PageStream4. It will be slower in some regards. It has more complex
> color management, antialiased drawing, alpha channel blending, and other
> features which impact the redrawing of the page. It also does more with
> buffers to reduce the slow down, and on modern hardware you don't notice
> it. As to what will be the final result on 68k, which is already
> dependent on intense optimization from PageStream 4, I don't know.

That's REALLY INTERESTING, the FIRST bit of specific info as to how the
changes WILL impact on, and be incorporated in PgS5 for Amiga users.

From what you have said it should work OK on an 060, so I'm quite optimistic
... ready next week ?

>
> If that is wasting your time, well, I can't answer that one. The issue
> of speed is not black & white. I can't bare to run PageStream on classic
> hardware,

Well we can't have a thought image of you sitting naked "bare" running
PageStream, I couldn't bear it, could we.

What's the problem with running it on 68k hardware, as that's where it's
intended for eventually, and if it runs on 68k hardware, the emulators will
more than likely handle it much better, rather than try to get a PC or any
other hardware than 68k, running a 68k emulator to develop a 68k program. An
Amiga 68k computer was designed to handle 68k code, it is not an emulator,
and so interprets the code directly as it was intended. However, if there is
some bug in the emulator then that just exacerbates any programming to
develop the 68k program. Design it on an 68k machine to run it on a 68k
system, and an emulator will do what is required when you have developed it.
That was my thought process, but the ultimate decision is yours, but what I
have said makes perfectly good common sense to me.

> but I also use PageStream on much faster hardware. I used to
> program on an Apple II with floppy disks. When I got a hard drive, I
> could not longer stand the floppy drive. The floppy drive didn't get
> slower. I just got used to faster.

Entirely understandable.

>
>>
>>>> How can you port the software when you aren't developing it on the
>>>> correct hardware?
>>>>
>>
>>
>>> Well, the correct hardware is perspective.
>>>
>>
>> It's not perspective when transferring it from your emulator system on
>> which
>> it works shows that it is basically, well totally, unusable on a real 68k
>> Amiga or a PPC OS4.x system, is it?.
>>
>
> I'm not going to keep talking in circles with you. You want me to
> develop on _your_ hardware.

No I want you to test it on **your Amiga hardware** - 68k processor and a
board designed by Commodore to handle the signals, code, etc - NOT an
emulator, so we get as close to what a native 68k program should be, so
eventually we get to the finishing line quicker & a good 68k program.

I'm developing on the hardware which I think best summarizes my market.

You obviously must make that decision, but I beg you to consider trialing it
on your own A4000, as you develop it. It's no good handing something to us
Amigans to try PgS that you either don't know how it will actually run on a
68k system or have tested it on your emulated Amiga & know it works or that
it just keeps crashing/locking-up, at some point on either hardware.

> You act like PageStream doesn't work for you,
> and now it sounds like you just have issue with various bits. I'm trying
> to get everyone to the point where they can open a new window.

I understand this now you have explained it, but maybe you should have let
us know that already, & also on each release, and what you are trying to get
us all to achieve for you, so that you know you can proceed to your next
step/stage in development of PgS.

> If you are doing that, then your issues are not the issues I am sorting
> out.
> Issues like no move bar on the toolbar are known issues, and are true on
> every single system configuration.

I didn't know that, **every single system configuration** had problems with
the toolbar move bar. Of course I know that now, and won't mention it unless
asked about again.

It would be helpful if we also had a list of what was a problem on ALL
current releases, so we don't mention what you already have to fix on all
the PgS versions, as I feel sure this is not common knowledge, but I could
be mistaken.

>
>
> I should summarize this with a statement to everyone who wants to second
> guess what platform I should be developing for and which ones I
> shouldn't. My choices are based on sales. Maybe 5.0 won't sell enough on
> the Amiga to warrant a 5.1/6.0 whatever. I'll cross that road when I get
> to it. If I could make a profit developing PageStream for Atari ST, Palm
> OS, or pocket watches, I would. Just because it is not the best
> platform, or your platform, is irrelevant.

I get your drift, nice to know.

Your response, though later than I expected, is understandable, seeing as
you are busy with development, but troubled me when I didn't get a reply. I
thought I had upset you, and that was not my intent, I just wanted a
realistic situation report, where possible, and a reply about any
development tools for 68k that I could use to assist you to develop/debug
PgS, but just like you I need certain information to be able to help you in
the way that you want helping. I feel sure other users want to know this,
and why you are going down the route you are, and where it is leading, like
the questions I have already asked above.

THANKS, & again THANKS for the reply. I now feel much better informed as a
result of your reply.

As usual, anything I realistically can do to help you I will.

Hope to speak to you again soon

Neil Pearson

Hello Everyone,

For some years I have been using a HP LaserJet 1200 printer and it
has worked really well – prints fine, never jams, accepts any
thickness of paper without complaining. In short, for me, the ideal
printer.

However with a tremendous grinding of gears an squealing of bearings
it has finally given up the ghost. Furthermore this model is no
longer available.

So I bought an HP LaserJet P2055d printer which appears to have a
similar specification including PostScript printing. However, when I
tried it with a PGS document it failed to reproduce the screening of
pictures for reproduction i.e. so many dots per inch at such an angle
which is essential for my work.

I tried several drivers from the internet but none of them would get
the printer to reproduce this feature.

I madfe further enquiries on the internet and several contributors
said that they had the same problem with this printer and had been
unable to soilve it.

I sent the printer back so I am now without a satisfactory printer
with a deadline looming.

My question to you folk is therefore: Does anyone know of a similar
PostScript printer to the HP laserJet 1200 which will print
PostScript including the screening of pictures?

Various conditions:

1. I live in the UK so it must be available in the UK.

2. Not too expensive. The HP LaserJet p2055d was £215.00 But I would
be willing to go to double that for a printer which really worked.

3. My setup is Mac G4 Dual 450 MHz Power PC running Mac OS X 10.4.11
and PGS 5.0.5.1 Pro.

Any help or advice would be very much appreciated.

With many thanks,

Cheerio,

Terence Casey

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I know this won't help you now, but usually the problem with HP printers
is that they use a special halftone function which doesn't have a
freq/angle concept. However, but specifying a frequency, angle _&_ spot
function, you can kick that halftone function out and get your frequency
and angle. In PageStream's case, you could specify the spot function in
a bit of postscript code at the end of the postscript prolog. Not an
elegant solution, but it works.

As to what printer is best, I'll let others make a recommendation. The
only true PostScript printers I have owned are the old Apple brand
LaserWriters, and HPs

Deron

> Hello Everyone,
>
> For some years I have been using a HP LaserJet 1200 printer and it
> has worked really well – prints fine, never jams, accepts any
> thickness of paper without complaining. In short, for me, the ideal
> printer.
>
> However with a tremendous grinding of gears an squealing of bearings
> it has finally given up the ghost. Furthermore this model is no
> longer available.
>
> So I bought an HP LaserJet P2055d printer which appears to have a
> similar specification including PostScript printing. However, when I
> tried it with a PGS document it failed to reproduce the screening of
> pictures for reproduction i.e. so many dots per inch at such an angle
> which is essential for my work.
>
> I tried several drivers from the internet but none of them would get
> the printer to reproduce this feature.
>
> I madfe further enquiries on the internet and several contributors
> said that they had the same problem with this printer and had been
> unable to soilve it.
>
> I sent the printer back so I am now without a satisfactory printer
> with a deadline looming.
>
> My question to you folk is therefore: Does anyone know of a similar
> PostScript printer to the HP laserJet 1200 which will print
> PostScript including the screening of pictures?
>
> Various conditions:
>
> 1. I live in the UK so it must be available in the UK.
>
> 2. Not too expensive. The HP LaserJet p2055d was £215.00 But I would
> be willing to go to double that for a printer which really worked.
>
> 3. My setup is Mac G4 Dual 450 MHz Power PC running Mac OS X 10.4.11
> and PGS 5.0.5.1 Pro.
>
> Any help or advice would be very much appreciated.
>
> With many thanks,
>
> Cheerio,
>
> Terence Casey

--
Happy Trails,
Deron Kazmaier deron@dogstarkennel.com
KD0AYO Western South Dakota
Dog Star Kennelhttp://www.dogstarkennel.com
--- Racing AKC Sepp-Star Seppala Siberian Husky Sled Dogs